In debate, a framework is the standard a team asks the judge to use when evaluating the round. A framework tells the judge which arguments should count, which should not, and how to weigh competing claims. Whoever establishes the framework often controls how the judge sees the rest of the debate.
Examples of Frameworks
A team defending a public health policy might argue: 'Judge, you should evaluate this round based on which policy saves the most lives.' A team opposing it might counter: 'No - you should evaluate based on which policy most protects individual liberty.' Those are two different frameworks, and whichever the judge accepts tends to decide the round.
Why Frameworks Matter
Frameworks matter because they prioritize certain types of impacts over others. A team that wins the framework but loses most specific arguments can still win the round because their framework made the arguments they did win matter more. Experienced debaters spend real time fighting over frameworks, not just over individual claims.